Thursday, April 14, 2011

Stade Francais came back from being 16-0 down to take a narrow 32-28 victory over Montpellier in their Amlin Challenge Cup quarter-final on the weekend. They progress to the semi final, where they will face rivals Clermont Auvergne.

The Paris side scored four tries as both teams played some highly entertaining rugby in an open, free flowing game. One was a penalty try, while the others were scored by Hugo Southwell, Tom Palmer, and Antoine Burban.

Southwell’s was probably the pick of them, with a runaway solo effort after Montpellier had built up an attack with some great interplay, before coughing the ball up.

One of the best parts of the try was actually the reverse-flick-pass by Montpellier’s number eight, Marc Giraud, before possession was lost. Scotland’s Southwell then streaked away, showing good pace and beating the last man nicely.

He nearly scored again later, following a great chip and chase, but his foot was out.

Stade Francais will face Clermont in the semi final, and ironically have them next in the Top 14 too, something that’s bemused assistant coach Chris Whitaker.

"We play them this weekend and then in two weeks' time in the Amlin again.

"It was the same with Montpellier as we played them two weeks ago as well. It's worked out a little bit funny and it is a strange one," he said.

U are in the wrong article. I know that u are more interested in cueto undefendable eye-gouge but here is just what rugby should be: nice offloads and try

But to react on your link, Yeah Quite interesting and fascinating how rfu tries to be transparent on a very trouble event. Their 9 weeks ban was Not enough, they needed to communicate on the incredible "friendship" and support between both players, clubs and rfu...Result: a teletubbies story where everybody have remorse and feelings.... with a ban like a present for cueto.

Regarding the Southwell issue (et over Cueto's ban, lads), I think Andy Robinson should look at James Cuthbert and Jim Thompson at fullback for Scotland.

Southweel is not a bad player but is a bit like Stephen Donald, Jerome Porical or Stephen Jones -consistent, always helpful but far from brilliant, and a little extra pace in the back three surely would help, specially now that Thom Evans is out.

I don't get the decision...i think it's a pile of nonsense bullshit!1/Cueto pleaded guilty...2/The panel describes the matter as "The Player then shakes his right hand loose from the grip of Day and moves his right hand into the eye area of Day, grasping him with crooked fingers and applying force in a pushing motion".Which for me is quiet a strong description (grasp, crooked fingers, applying force) and sounds like an eye gauging, no?3/Mr Day + Cueto say is not intentional, Mr Cueto big wigs friends say he's a nice guy.4/Sentence is 9 weeks.

Why?The panel describes Cueto's act as "MID RANGE, giving an entry point of eighteen weeks" but then considers some mitigation factors such as the written letters ( from M. Johnson, etc) and bla bla bla really, and lowers the sentence to 9 weeks.

This sentence is a disgrace to me in regards to the law and in regards to the risks involved for the players.

I quote "The Player targeted the head and grabbed at the eye area with his right hand in a claw-like grip. To get to the back of the head, he had to go past the eye area at eye level. This involved an inherently high risk of serious injury and he was fortunate that no such injury was caused".

The panel meant Cueto intentionally made contact in the eye area "in a claw like grip" but he did nicely as being Mr Nice and only wanted to smash Mr Day's head...ooops

This decision is a disgrace for the sport and is clearly a partisan decision. I find it shocking.

Clearly if Mr Day would have lost an eye, or been injured to some extend the panel would have given a much longer sentence. But still Cueto knew what he was doing, the risks he was taken and did it intentionally ...a court should judge the intention in any act that could injure someone precisely to make sure that no one does it again, that no one takes the chance of doing something risky around the eye area.

Frenchy, im assuming the name has something to do with your nationality.

Im not really a fan of Cueto, i dont see him play much and havent really noticed him on the pitch (not being an england fan might be a reason..)

However, i've read how day said it was NOT a gouge and felt no pressure..

...so i dont understand how anyone can argue it was a gouge....

We all watch movies right? we all see actors 'punching' other actors right...now if we said 'did he really punch you' and the guy says no, then what do we believe...what we think we saw? or what the guy on the receiving end says...

WHEREAS, attoub and dupuy, both got their backsides handed to them because of testimonies...you think if ferris said, 'ah no, he was just picking my nose for me' that dupuy would still be handed a big ban? ofcourse not, he would be banned for recklessness and it would be of similar time to cueto/burger...

gotta agree with no.7 here. I thought it looked really bad and expected a long ban. But when the opposing player says he felt no gouge you can understand why they were lenient. If Day had said he was gouged then I would like to think cueto would have missed the world cup!

With all my respect, i find ur arguments a bit naiveThere is of course, a players solidarity. Day is a friend of cueto, it is notified and justified by the both "it was a schoolboys tussle"... Comon! I dont say that johnno or rfu have asked him to minimize the thing, but there is a serious problem of impartiality here. Friendship and england rwc chances had No place here... i Irb must be very unhappy about it.

To conclude, dupuy had not any problem of discipline before beigne sanctionned of 24 weeks without reduction. As coward it was (as cueto), blackett didnt reduce the ban. It says a lot...

Are you sure that's Hugo Southwell? Bah, I suppose he has to do something right sometimes. He's my favourite rubbish player, other that Clement Poitrenaud. Always going to make a crucial, silly mistake.